CompFox Logo
AboutWorkflowFeaturesPricingCase LawInsights

Updated Daily

Case Law Database

Access over workers' compensation decisions, including En Banc, Significant Panel Decisions, and writ-denied cases.

Case No. ADJ8026817
Regular
Apr 22, 2013

MARIA OCHOA vs. RANGERS DIE CASTING COMPANY, COMPWEST INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of a decision finding the applicant sustained injury to her respiratory system and psyche AOE/COE. The WCAB rescinded the decision and returned the case to the trial level, finding the medical opinions of Dr. Lipper and Dr. Curtis lacked substantiality. Specifically, the physicians failed to provide clear diagnoses, quantify exposures, or adequately explain causation. The Board noted contradictory testimony from the applicant's supervisor and insufficient evidence to support the initial findings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardMaria OchoaRangers Die Casting CompanyCOMPWEST INSURANCE COMPANYADJ8026817Los Angeles District OfficeOpinion and Order Granting ReconsiderationDecision After ReconsiderationFindings of FactWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge (WCJ)
References
Case No. ADJ8718900
Regular
Jun 27, 2019

JOSE ANTONIO RAMIREZ RAYA vs. JOANNE RUIZ, dba J'S SPORTS BAR & GRILL

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted defendant's petition for removal, rescinding the judge's order that denied a motion to quash a deposition of defense counsel. The Board found that depositions of opposing counsel are disfavored and require a high standard of cause, which was not met. Furthermore, the judge denied the motion without a hearing or proper justification, violating due process. The case is returned to the trial level for further proceedings, emphasizing the need for well-supported discovery requests given the age of the claim.

Petition for RemovalMotion to QuashDeposition of Defense CounselOpposing Counsel DepositionDisfavored DiscoveryIntoxication DefenseLabor Code Section 3600(a)(4)Burden of ProofPanel QMEStipulation
References
Case No. AHM 0109985
Regular
Aug 04, 2008

JOSE PERDOMO vs. ABC SUPPLY COMPANY, INC., ESIS

This case involves a dispute over a deposition scheduled by applicant's counsel, which defense counsel claims was erroneously set and misrepresented. The defendant sought removal of an order that took the case off calendar, alleging prejudice from applicant's counsel's representations. The Appeals Board granted removal, rescinded the off-calendar order, and returned the matter to the trial level to determine the conflicting factual claims regarding the deposition.

Petition for RemovalOrder Taking Off CalendarAppirionWCJDepositionApplicant CounselDefense CounselVerified AnswerReport and RecommendationTrial Level
References
Case No. ADJ7646278
Regular
May 25, 2012

KIRK ALVARADO vs. ALL AMERICAN ASPHALT, SEABRIGHT INSURANCE COMPANY

Former applicant's counsel sought reconsideration of an arbitrator's order requiring them to pay $525.00 to reimburse the defendant for a failed deposition. The arbitrator based the order on a "fair balance" rather than bad faith, believing the defense was ready to proceed. However, the Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinding the cost order. The Board found that miscommunication between the applicant and his attorney, not counsel's fault, caused the deposition's failure.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationDecision After ReconsiderationFailed DepositionReimbursement of CostsLabor Code Section 5811MiscommunicationApplicant's CounselDefense CounselAward of Costs
References
Case No. ADJ8070046, ADJ10519001
Regular
Jun 11, 2018

LASHAWN WILLIAMS vs. LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

This case involved sanctions imposed on applicant's attorney for verbally abusing opposing counsel. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration, reducing the sanctions from $750 to $500 because the WCJ improperly cited prior misconduct not included in the notice. The WCAB affirmed the award of $193.75 in costs, finding it reasonable for defense counsel's time spent addressing the incident. The attorney's petition for disqualification of the WCJ was denied, as the allegations were untimely, unsubstantiated, and based on general adverse rulings rather than actual bias.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardSanctionsReconsiderationDisqualificationWCJApplicant's CounselDefense CounselMandatory Settlement ConferenceVerbal AbuseCosts
References
Case No. ADJ8596014
Regular
Nov 07, 2018

DION GEORGE vs. KJI PLUMBING, INC., ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves a $\$ 750$ sanction imposed by a WCJ against defense counsel and KJI Plumbing for defense counsel's failure to appear at a hearing. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, finding the failure to appear was due to defense counsel's negligence, not willful misconduct. Consequently, the Board reduced the sanction to $\$ 250$ and removed KJI Plumbing as a liable party, solely sanctioning defense counsel and his law office. The Board cautioned that future failures to appear could establish a pattern justifying larger sanctions.

Petition for ReconsiderationOrder Imposing SanctionsWCJDefense CounselJointly and SeverallyUninsured Employers Benefits Trust FundMandatory Settlement ConferenceDeclaration of ReadinessLabor Code § 5813WCAB Rule 10561
References
Case No. ADJ7934571
Regular
Dec 03, 2014

NANCY GREYSON vs. TUCALOTA SPRINGS RV PARK, CARL WARREN & COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's Petition for Reconsideration. The Board adopted the Administrative Law Judge's report, finding the applicant sustained a continuous trauma injury AOE/COE. The defendant's arguments regarding continuous trauma versus specific injury and the AME's findings were rejected. Additionally, the Board ordered defense counsel to comply with WCAB Rule 10550 regarding proper identification of parties, as the defendant's identity was unclear throughout the proceedings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationWCAB Rule 10550Defense CounselSubstitution of CounselMinutes of HearingApplicant IdentityDefendant IdentityAdministrative Law JudgeInjury AOE/COE
References
Case No. ADJ8939095
Regular
Feb 04, 2014

CRISTAL QUINTERO vs. WHOLE FOODS MARKET, INC.; ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE

This case involves defense counsel seeking reconsideration of a sanctions order. The administrative law judge sanctioned the defense for filing a Declaration of Readiness to Proceed on an AOE/COE issue when the actual dispute was discovery-related. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinding the sanctions order. The Board found that while defense counsel should have used other procedural mechanisms for discovery disputes, their actions did not demonstrate the bad faith required for sanctions, though they were cautioned against future similar conduct.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationSanctions OrderLabor Code Section 5813Declaration of Readiness to ProceedPriority ConferenceInjury AOE/COEDiscovery DisputeBad FaithAdministrative Law Judge
References
Case No. ADJ7745775
Regular
Jun 16, 2015

ENRIQUE CASTANEDA vs. MONTEREY MUSHROOMS, INC., CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION For SUPERIOR NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) affirmed the February 4, 2014 Findings of Fact and awarded further medical treatment for applicant Enrique Castaneda against Monterey Mushrooms, Inc. The WCAB also imposed sanctions of $500.00 against defense counsel Peter R. Nelson and his firm, jointly and severally, for intemperate language used during advocacy. Defense counsel's objection and apology were considered, leading to a reduced sanction amount. The sanctions were justified by the board's need to address the counsel's inappropriate language, which diverted resources.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationSanctionsIntemperate languageHeat of advocacyDefense counselPetition for ReconsiderationFindings of FactFurther medical treatmentAward
References
Case No. ADJ6655570
Regular
Oct 31, 2011

Pamela Lial vs. COUNTY OF STANISLAUS

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded the prior decision, finding the Agreed Medical Evaluator's (AME) opinion was not substantial evidence. The AME's opinion was deemed unreliable due to potential bias from defense counsel, insufficient medical history, and questionable diagnostic reasoning. The Board remanded the case for further development of the medical record and a new evaluation, instructing the Workers' Compensation Judge (WCJ) to analyze potential actual employment events and personnel actions under the *Rolda* standard. The WCJ must determine if applicant sustained industrial psychiatric injury, considering whether any personnel actions were lawful and in good faith, and if so, if they substantially caused the injury.

Workers Compensation Appeals Boardpsychiatric injuryAgreed Medical Evaluator (AME)defense counselcase lawapplicant's allegationssupervisor relationshippersonnel action defenselawful nondiscriminatory good faith personnel actioncausation
References
Showing 1-10 of 1,309 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.

CompFox Logo

The AI standard for workers' compensation professionals. Faster research, deeper analysis, better outcomes.

Product

  • Platform
  • Workflow
  • Features
  • Pricing

Solutions

  • Defense Firms
  • Applicants' Attorneys
  • Insurance carriers
  • Medical Providers

Company

  • About
  • Insights
  • Case Law

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms
  • Trust
  • Cookies
  • Subscription

© 2026 CompFox Inc. All rights reserved.

Systems Operational